Professional Documents
Culture Documents
453
HIDEYUKI YOSHIMOTO
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies*
Abstract
Although the sceptical chymist Robert Boyle is generally known as an experimental natural philosopher, he was also the child of a culture of bookish erudition. By quoting diverse classical, medieval, Renaissance and contemporary authors, he gave to his readers the impression that he could avail himself of a very
wide range of sources. In some cases, however, his apparent erudition was largely
dependant on contemporary doxographical commonplace-books. This article
unveils one of these books, Johann Gerhards Decas quaestionum physico-chymicarum
de metallis (1643), which served Boyle as his secret source for past authoritative
views on the issue of the growth of metals. We also discuss the way in which he
manipulated the information he found in this book in order to increase the credibility of his own discourse.
Introduction
In order to understand an authors thought in its philosophical
and historical context, it is very important to trace the sources
on which he founded his ideas. It is through this procedure of
Quellenforschung that one can really measure his debt to forerunners as well as his originality. In the case of the sceptical chymist
Robert Boyle (1627-1691), even a superficial reading of his writings, which have recently been edited by Michael Hunter and
Edward B. Davis, will strike us for the erudition that is present
even in his early scientific writings.1 The knowledge he displays
*
We acknowledge Larry Principe, Myriam Dennehy and the friends of bibliotheca hermetica, M. Iwata, H. Ogawa, Y. Ohashi, A. Murase, Y. Akae and Y. Kikuchi
for their help in the preparation of the present paper. Its French version will be
published in La philosophie naturelle de Robert Boyle (Paris: Vrin, forthcoming).
1
Michael Hunter and Edward B. Davis (eds.), The Works of Robert Boyle (Lon-
esm10-4.pmd
453
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
454
is based not only on the classical authors but also on those of the
Renaissance and of his own time. It is true that Boyle was scrupulous in gathering information from his own experiments as
well as from friends and colleagues. Fascinated by strange phenomena, he eagerly collected precise and detailed testimonies
about them, following a Baconian program for experimental
natural history.2 But this aspect has been so much emphasized
that one sometimes forgets that he was also the child of a culture
of bookish learning. Indeed, it appears that he was widely read
in diverse genres of literature such as pharmacopeias, travelers
memoirs, natural histories, medical and chymical recipes, etc.
But a simple question springs to mind. How could the young
Boyle have gathered such an amount of knowledge in a very
short time after 1649? Is there any possibility that he used some
sort of guidebook or commonplace-book, that is, compendia of
a doxographical nature?3 While this question will continue to
guide our collaborative research, the present article provides a
first, affirmative answer concerning Boyles use of a precise
doxographical source in his discussion of the problem of the
growth of metals, one of his favorite subjects.
Observations about the Growth of Metals (1674)
In 1674, Boyle published his Hidden Qualities of the Air, which is
included in the eighth volume of the new edition of his works.4
In this treatise, he describes, as a proof for the existence of the
airs hidden qualities, the growth of metals which are extracted
don, 1999-2000). For his letters, see Michael Hunter et al. (eds.), The Correspondence of Robert Boyle (1636-91) (London, 2001). To avoid the erroneous distinction
between chemistry and alchemy, we use the term chymistry in our discussion, following the suggestion of William R. Newman and Lawrence M. Principe,
Alchemy vs. Chemistry: The Etymological Origins of a Historiographic Mistake,
Early Science and Medicine 3 (1998), 32-65.
2
See Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, Wonders and the Order of Nature,
1150-1750 (New York, 1998). On his Baconian program, see Rose-Mary Sargent,
Robert Boyles Baconian Inheritance, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
17 (1986), 469-86; ead., The Diffident Naturalist: Robert Boyle and the Philosophy of
Experiment (Chicago, 1995).
3
On commonplace-books, see especially Francis Goyet, Le sublime du lieu
commun: linvention rhtorique dans lantiquit et la Renaissance (Paris, 1996); Ann
Moss, Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought (Oxford,
1996).
4
Boyle, Hidden Qualities of the Air (London, 1674), 1-71 (Works, VIII, 121-42).
esm10-4.pmd
454
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
455
from the mines and are exposed to the air.5 However, as he finds
it inappropriate to develop a long discussion on the phenomenon at this point, he appends a few pages of observations,
apparently based on his reading notes. The piece is entitled
Observations about the Growth of Metals in their Ore Exposed
to the Air.6 He says that this piece is closely related to his essay
on the regeneration of salt, which is included in Certain Physiological Essays (London, 1661).7 Despite some revisions he introduced for its publication, its origin lies thus in the early phase
of his scientific career, around 1660.
Boyle states that the object of this piece is not to decide whether
metals grow in the bowel of the earth like subterranean plants,
the question traditionally discussed by alchemists, but to show
that metals extracted and exposed to the air increase their weight
or volume and that a substance which was previously not a metal
turns into one. However, since he estimates that the experiments
required to achieve this purpose are too difficult, he satisfies
himself by observing the testimonies found in the writings of
mineralogists, travelers and the other authors of good credit.
First, Boyle gives some reports on the growth of tin ore in a
mine that had once been emptied by miners and had naturally
filled again in the course of time. His source of information
remains unknown.8 Next, he takes up the case of lead. He suggests that the growth of lead ore is more visible than that of
other metals. In this account, he gives two quotations in Latin.
In this case, he clarifies the books that serve as his sources. For
the first one, he even gives the page number of the copy in his
possession. This treatise is the Decas quaestionum physico-chymicarum
5
esm10-4.pmd
455
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
456
Without any interval, Boyle goes on to quote his second testimony for the growth of lead, which is taken from the De ortu et
causis subterraneorum (Basel, 1546) of Georg Agricola (1494-1555),
the sixteenth centurys most important writer on the mining
world.10 However, exactly the same extract is also found in
Gerhards text. When we compare the wording of the three men,
one is led to suspect that Boyle follows Gerhard rather than
Agricola here.11
Boyle, Works, VIII, 147.
9
We have used the following edition: Johann Gerhard, Decas quaestionum
physico-chymicarum selectiorum et graviorum, omnibus tam Hermeticae quam Peripateticae
philosophiae studiosis scitu necessariarum, Lectu jucundarum atque utilium de metallis
(Tbingen, Philibert Brunn, 1643). On Gerhard, see John Ferguson, Bibliotheca
chemica (Glasgow, 1906), I, 311-3; Ernst Conrad, Die Lehrsthle der Universitt Tbingen und ihre Inhaber (1477-1927) (Tbingen, 1960), 29, 97.
10
On this treatise, see Hirai, Le concept de semence, 111-34. We have used the
first edition.
11
Notable differences will be underlined throughout.
esm10-4.pmd
456
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
457
esm10-4.pmd
457
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
458
15
Gerhard, Decas, i, 22-3. Cf. Thomas of Cantimpr, Liber de naturis rerum, XV,
vii, 9; Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum naturale, VII, xl; Cardano, De subtilitate, V (ed.
Lyon, 1580, 197). On the pan-vitalist mineralogy of Cardano and Albertus Magnus
as his source, see Hirai, Le concept de semence, 136-56.
16
Gerhard, Decas, i, 24. Cf. Cesalpino, De metallicis, III, vii. For the De metallicis
of Cesalpino, we have used its second edition (Nuremberg, 1602). On this treatise, see Hirai, Le concept de semence, 159-75. On Petrus Bonus, see DSB 10 (1974),
554-6; Lynn Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science (New York,
1934), III, 147-62; Chiara Crisciani, The Conception of Alchemy as Expressed in
the Pretiosa margarita novella of Petrus Bonus, Ambix 20 (1973), 165-81.
17
Cf. Strabo, Geography, V, ii, 6; Pliny, Natural History, III, vi, 81; XXXIV, xli,
142. On the classical ideas on the fertility of mines, see Robert Halleux, Fcondit des mines et sexualit des pierres dans lAntiquit grco-romaine, Revue belge
de philologie et dhistoire 49 (1970), 16-24.
esm10-4.pmd
458
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
459
esm10-4.pmd
459
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
460
Mathesius, Sarepta ?
The key to identifying the real author of this quotation is undoubtedly hidden in the German technical terms Gummer and
Sinder. But unfortunately, specialized dictionaries of Mathesius
vocabulary have not given us an answer.20
After the case of iron, Boyle turns to the growth of silver ore
as witnessed in the mines of Potosi in Peru. Here, the editors of
Boyles Works identify his source as the French traveler Melchisdech Thvenot (1620-1692).21 With regard to the growth of
19
Jorden, A Discourse of Naturall Bathes, 52, had already attributed the Conciones metallicae to Mathesius. On Mathesius and his Sarepta, see ADB 20 (1884),
586-9; NDB 17 (1990), 369-70; Ernst Gpfert, Die Bergmannssprache in der Sarepta
des Johann Mathesius (Strasburg, 1902); Frank D. Adams, The Birth and Development
of the Geological Sciences (New York, 11938/21954), 196-8; Franz Kirnbauer, Johannes
Mathesius und der Bergbau: Zur 450. Wiederkehr seines Geburtstages (Vienna, 1954);
John R. Partington, A History of Chemistry (London, 1961), II, 62-4.
20
The editors of the new edition wrongly render Amberga as Hamburg
instead of Amberg in Bavaria (Works, VIII, 148 n. a). The dates of birth and death
of Gerhard are also wrong. For the Sarepta, they give the reference of 1571 edition probably according to the note of Arthur Rupert Hall and Marie Boas Hall
(eds.), The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg (Madison, 1966), III, 305, n. 1. But
there is no particular reason to fix it as such. According to Oldenburgs letter to
Boyle (25 November 1667), Boyle seems to have obtained the copy of the Sarepta
after this date. Cf. Boyle, Correspondence, III, 612. As for Sinder, which is now
Sinter in German, Agricola recorded it as recrementum ferri in his Interpretatio rerum metallicarum (ed. Basel, 1546, 483 = Ausgewhlte Werke, III, 37).
21
Boyle, Growth of Metals, 17-8 (Works, VIII, 150, n. a).
esm10-4.pmd
460
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
461
esm10-4.pmd
461
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
462
25
26
esm10-4.pmd
462
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
463
for all by God in the act of creation, but that they continue to
be formed even now. Boyle first presents the case of the growth
of stalactites in the French cave called Goutieres. He then
turns to the growth of diamonds, basing himself on the memoirs
of the voyages to the East Indies by the Dutch traveler Jan van
Linschoten (1563-1633) and by the Portuguese botanist Garcia
da Orta (ca. 1500-ca. 1568), whose name, however, is not given.
According to their reports, exhausted diamond mines were found
to produce anew after a few years.27
As these two testimonies seem sufficient to prove the growth
of minerals, Carneades turns to that of metals, quoting successively eight reports from Continental writers of good note. Most
of these narratives are in Latin, which creates a singular atmosphere in this part of the Sceptical Chymist, because there is no
other part in this work where such a concentration of Latin
quotations is found. Together, these testimonies champion the
view that metals were not only formed at the beginning of the
world but that they still grow daily. This implies that non-metallic substances continue to turn into metals. Although Carneades
finds many statements to this effect in the writings of experienced chymists, he prefers the reports of learned mineralogists
who are of good credit and close to miners, thereby avoiding the
danger of simply repeating what credulous chymists may have
said.28 It is clear that he attributes more authority to these unsuspected writers than to the chymists.
The first account he gives is by Falloppio, although Boyle does
not specify the work in which he found it. However, somewhat
surprisingly, the first part of the quotation does not seem to
come from Falloppio himself. On the basis of our previous experience, it is worth comparing Boyle not only with Falloppio
himself, but also with Gerhard. Here is the result.29
27
Boyle, Sceptical Chymist, vi, 357 (Works, II, 347). This story was so pleasing to
Boyle that he used it again in his Usefulness, I, iv, 80 (Works, III, 254). On the
botanical treatise of Garcia da Orta, see DSB 10 (1974), 236-8; Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science, VI, 313-5.
28
Boyle, Sceptical Chymist, vi, 357 (Works, II, 348).
29
For the De thermalibus aquis of Falloppio, we have used its second edition
(Venice, 1569). On this work, see Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental
Science, VI, 1941, 311-3; Giancarlo Zanier, Medicina e filosofia tra 500 e 600 (Milan,
1983), 5-19; Partington, A History of Chemistry, II, 100-1; Richard Palmer, Pharmacy in the Republic of Venice in the Sixteenth Century, in Andrew Wear et al.
(eds.), The Medical Renaissance of the Sixteenth Century (Cambridge, 1985), 100-17;
esm10-4.pmd
463
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
464
Falloppio, De thermalibus
aquis, v, f. 16 b.
esm10-4.pmd
464
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
465
Falloppio, De thermalibus
aquis, v, f. 16 b.
esm10-4.pmd
465
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
466
moto, Chemical Studies of Young Boyle: Their Helmontian Phase and the Seminal Principles, Kagakushi 19 (1992), 233-46; Peter R. Anstey, Boyle on Seminal Principles, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biology 33 (2002), 597-630.
32
The editors provide an erroneous reference to Agricolas De re metallica
(1530 [sic!]). But the quote is neither from the Bermannus sive de re metallica
(Basel, 1530) nor from the De re metallica libri XII (Basel, 1556), but from the De
veteribus et novis metallis (Basel, 1546). We have used its first edition.
esm10-4.pmd
466
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
467
33
Giovanni Boccaccio de Certaldo, De montibus, sylvis, fontibus (Venice,
1473), without pagination [f. 9 r] = Tutte le opere di Giovanni Boccaccio (Milan,
1998), v. VII-VIII, t. 2, 1848.
34
Boyle eliminated the German inscription zu der Freyhung, because he
probably could not understand why it was there.
esm10-4.pmd
467
10/20/2005, 12:23 PM
468
35
Thus, the editors note is doubly in error for the name of Johann Conrad
Gerhard and for the dates of birth and death (1582-1637), which are those of the
Lutheran theologian and not of two chymists.
36
We have not been able to identify this Schroeterus.
37
On Grasse, see Thomas Lederer, Der Klner Kurfrst Herzog Ernst von Bayern
(1554-1612) und sein Rat Johann Grasse (um 1560-1618) als Alchemiker der frhen
Neuzeit: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Paracelsismus, Ph. D. diss. (University of
Heidelberg, 1992); id., Leben, Werke und Wirkung des Stralsunder Fachschriftstellers Johann Grasse (nach 1560-1618), in Wilhelm Khlmann and Horst
Langer (eds.), Pommern in der frhen Neuzeit: Literatur und Kultur in Stadt und Region (Tbingen, 1994), 227-37. On Ernest of Bavaria, see also Robert Halleux and
Anne-Catherine Berns, La cour savante dErnest de Bavire, Archives internationales dhistoire des sciences 45 (1995), 3-29.
38
On Johann Agricola, see his letter to Boyle (6 April 1668) in Boyle, Correspondence, IV, 59.
esm10-4.pmd
468
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
469
even authentic. Admittedly, Boyle was some years later to introduce a more mechanical explanation into his Growth of Metals. But that does not change the fact that this part of the
Sceptical Chymist is based on the same reading note.
Johann Gerhard and his chymico-mineralogical work (1643)
We shall now briefly analyze the work of Gerhard, Ten Best-Known
Physico-Chymical Questions on Metals. This treatise of 130 pages in
octavo is divided into ten chapters each of which is devoted to
one specific chymical problem.
1. Does nature still generate and regenerate metals? (29 pages)
2. Are metals composed of mercury and sulfur? (21)
3. Is heaven the efficient cause of metals, and is there goldmaking power in the stars? (31)
4. Where to find the seed, the aliment and the propagation of
gold and metals? (14)
5. Can metals be divided into imperfect and perfect ones? (6)
6. Does nature always tend towards gold in the generation of
metals? (4)
7. Can art imitate the nature in the generation of gold? (7)
8. Can art make gold more perfect? (10)
9. Can different species of metals be transformed into one another? (11)
10. Does the separation of the form of gold from its matter produce the philosophers tincture? (5)
The largest space is given to the first three questions. Although
Boyle uses only the first chapter, as far as we could see, let us
examine some major points of his work so as to understand
Gerhards method and the nature of his treatise.
Gerhards method is a fusion of the Renaissance humanists
concern for textual problems with that of the medieval alchemists doxographical interests, as evidence in the famous Rosarium
philosophorum (Frankfurt, 1550).39 His text abounds in quotations
from diverse writers, and each chapter compiles the ideas of
ancient, medieval and modern authors on a specific question.
39
See Joachim Telle et al. (eds.), Rosarium philosophorum: Ein alchemisches
Florilegium des Sptmittelalters (Weinheim, 1992).
esm10-4.pmd
469
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
470
40
Cf. William R. Newman, The Summa perfectionis of Pseudo-Geber (Leiden,
1991); id., Linfluence de la Summa perfectionis du pseudo-Geber, in Jean-Claude
Margolin and Sylvain Matton (eds.), Alchimie et philosophie la Renaissance (Paris,
1993), 65-77. On the ps.-Geber in Boyle, see Lawrence M. Principe, The Aspiring
Adept: Robert Boyle and his Alchemical Quest (Princeton, 1998), 153-5.
esm10-4.pmd
470
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
471
41
Boyle estimates de Boodt as the best author on the subject. Cf. Usefulness
(Works, III, 418, 422-3); Claytons Diamond (Works, IV, 189, 194-5); Origin and Virtues of Gems (Works, VII, 7, 19). On de Boodt, see Hirai, Le concept de semence, 37599; id., Les Paradoxes dEtienne de Clave et le concept de semence dans sa
minralogie, Corpus 39 (2001), 45-71; DSB 2 (1970), 292-3; Thorndike, A History
of Magic and Experimental Science, VI, 318-24; Robert Halleux, Luvre minralogique dAnselme Boce de Boodt (1550-1632), Histoire et Nature 14 (1979), 63-78.
42
On Quercetanus, see Hiro Hirai, Paracelsisme, noplatonisme et mdecine hermtique dans la thorie de la matire de Joseph Du Chesne travers son
Ad veritatem hermeticae medicinae (1604), Archives internationales dhistoire des sciences
51 (2001), 9-37; Didier Kahn, Linterprtation alchimique de la Gense chez
Joseph Du Chesne dans le contexte de ses doctrines alchimiques et cosmologiques, in Barbara Mahlmann-Bauer (ed.), Scientiae et artes: Die Vermittlung alten und
neuen Wissens in Literatur, Kunst und Musik (Wiesbaden, 2004), 641-92.
43
Gerhard, Decas, iii, 46-50. On the Geberian theory of mercury alone, see
Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science, III, 58; Newman, The Summa perfectionis of Pseudo-Geber, 204-8; id., Gehennical Fire: The Lives of George Starkey,
an American Alchemist in the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge MA, 1994), 86, 99;
Hirai, Le concept de semence, 30-1, 342-5.
esm10-4.pmd
471
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
472
esm10-4.pmd
472
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
473
345, 350). Hartlib also speaks of the Kleine Bauer in a letter to Oldenburg (2
December 1658). Cf. Hall and Hall, The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg, I, 1927. Hartlib knew the Bauer at least since 1648/9. See Hartlib Papers, 28/1/6A.
48
Boyle, Usefulness, I, iv, 79-80 (Works, III, 254).
49
On Conrad Gerhard, see Ferguson, Bibliotheca chemica, I, 312-3; Carlos Gilly,
Johann Valentin Andreae, 1586-1986 (Amsterdam, 1986), 47; Jost Weyer, Graf Wolfgang II. von Hohenlohe und die Alchemie: Alchemistische Studien in Schloss Weikersheim
(Sigmaringen, 1992), 393-4; Julius Paulus, Alchemie und Paracelsismus um 1600:
Siebzig Portrts, in Joachim Telle (ed.), Analecta Paracelsica: Studien zum Nachleben
Theophrast vom Hohenheims im deutschen Kulturgebiet der frhen Neuzeit (Stuttgart,
1994), 335-406, esp. 357.
50
Borel inverses the works of the father and the son in his Bibliotheca chimica
(Heidelberg, 1656; repr. Hildesheim, 1969), 98-9. On Borel, see Pierre Chabbert,
Pierre Borel (1620 ?-1671), Revue dhistoire des sciences 21 (1968), 303-43.
esm10-4.pmd
473
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
474
51
Sennert, De chymicorum consensu et dissensu, ix, 85-114. We have used its third
edition (Paris, 1633). Boyle probably used this edition too. For an analysis of the
chapter, see Hirai, Le concept de semence, 401-6.
52
Sennert, De chymicorum consensu et dissensu, 112-3.
esm10-4.pmd
474
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
475
esm10-4.pmd
475
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
476
esm10-4.pmd
476
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM
477
argentificum cum materia idonea coalescere et aurum vel argentum fieri; aurumque et argentum hoc, antequam solidescat, et
excoquatur, iterum a se posse spiritus argentificos et aurificos
emittere, qui materiam dispositam in aurum vel argentum convertant; et hoc modo perpetuari metallorum fodinas. Quod certe
ipsi ductus et fluxus venarum metallicarum monstrare videntur,
in quibus quid naturae vegetabili apparet. Idemque et hoc
confirmare videtur, quod a medico quodam experientissimo, qui
diu Fribergae, fodinis metallicis nobili Misniae oppido, medicinam
fecit, relatum scio. Is enim cum aliquos ex fossoribus metallicis
mortuos apervisset, in pulmonibus ea ipsa metalla concreta reperit,
in quibus effodiendis vivi laboraverant.
An tamen proprie crescere dici possint, dubitatur. J. C. Scaliger,
in lib. 1. De plantis, lapides crescere negat: Lapides, inquit,
crescunt, sed augescunt. Sic obtinebit augmentum generis proportionem ad incrementum. Ut illud sit apposita cujuscumque
modi quantitate: incrementum fiat occupationum, quoquo versum
capacioris loci ex promotione ambitus extimi, admissis intro
partibus, mutatis atque unitis.
Unde semen metallis et mineralibus si non univocum, certe
analogum nonnulli tribuendum (p. 114 a) censent. Hoc certum
esse puto, formas istas, seu semina seu seminarias rationes, ut
aliarum etiam rerum, a Deo primum creatas esse, ut rerum sui
generis sint principia. Et licet formae istae ac seminaria principia
in animalibus et plantis plerisque per certa corpora, quae semina
dicuntur, propagentur, et peculiari corpore spiritus ille architectonicus concludatur, in metallis tamen per totum corpus
dispergitur. Quod enim in salice et aliis plantis fieri videmus, ut
per ramum avulsum fiat propagatio, utpote in quibus seminale
principium per totam plantam, dispergitur: idem in metallis et
gemmis accidit, in quibus formale illud, aut si ita libeat appellare,
seminale principium, seu spiritus architectonicus in materia
metallica seu lapidescente occulto modo conclusus est. Qui plura
hac de re cognoscere cupit, legat cap. 13. lib De lapidibus et
gemmis, Anselmi Boetii, in quo postquam multis de figura sexangulari cristallorum et aliis gemmarum figuris disputavit, tandem concludit; se autumare naturam, ut cristallus hac nota ab
aliis gemmis distingueretur, ipsi hexagonam figuram dedisse, non
secus quam arborum frondibus et herbarum floribus peculiares
suas figuras dedit, quae ab architectonico spiritu et formatrice
facultate ignoto nobis modo fabricentur.
esm10-4.pmd
477
10/20/2005, 12:10 PM